Messerschmitt Bf109 Ideas

[sequoiaranger]

>I guess it would have the appearance like a Me.262 Carlos<

Now THERE is an idea!

Use the 262 fuselage, maybe with the Bf-109H extended wings to put the landing gear out from the fuselage. Bury the DB 605/603 a little back from the nose, with a propshaft extension to give room for a weapons bay (2 or 3 30mm?) in the nose around the propshaft. It would look somewhat like the original 262 prototype, but without the swept wings.

SOMEBODY DO THIS! 

[ysi_maniac]

I guess it would have the appearance like a Me.262 Carlos

Not much IMO, but can anyone post a photo of propeler driven Me-262?

Thanks.

[sequoiaranger]

Here's a link to a site that has pics:

http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/Me262/Me262.htm

The pic of the propeller-driven one has jet pods (no jets) on it--- that is not the original setup, but a later development. I will post a drawing of the non-jet-podded V1 here when I can.

Note that the first few Me-262's, even with jets, were tail-draggers.

OK--here are the drawings:

First, the original Me-262 V1 prototype:



Now, with a little "photoshopping", I have taken away the swept wings and moved the engine back a little:



For the sake of the "109 look", maybe replace the vertical tail with an Me-209 V5 tall tail or something.

Anyway, plenty of potential for a whif!!

[Doc Yo]

 Neat concepts! After years of dawdling, I finally started on a 109Z, bashed from a pair of old Airfix G's, with
a bit of help from a somewhat younger MPM H...naturally, I got as far as fixing the fuselage bumps on one side,
cutting away the section just in front of the cockpit and fairing in some plastic half-tube, when I got sidetracked,
but it'll get there. No idea what kind of finish I'm going to give it, but its already a whif of a whif-I decided to
give it tandem dual wheel landing gear for some reason.

Thinking on the wing, I wonder "what if Arthur Sack had been a little more precocious,( and a little more
  competent ) and had joined the Messerschmidt concern about '36 or so..." A disc-winged 109 that
would have rejoiced in the dubious designation SACKUNDSCHMIDT 109. ( just don't say it too fast. Anyway,
Himmler probably would have liked it. )

[ysi_maniac]

See here: http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,26644.0.html 

[kitnut617]

Now, with a little "photoshopping", I have taken away the swept wings and moved the engine back a little:

Nice   , I would maybe change the under nose radiator and go with the later under wing ones though and yes, go with the Me.109K tail

[sagallacci]

Yeah, I like that. Makes me want to do my '262 style canopy and P-51 style radiator '109K, very similar in concept.

I'd argue against the '262 style fuselage with buried engine and gun nose, if only to avoid having to have the heavy (and hard to synchronize) guns firing through the airscrew. Unless, of course, you have an enlarged hollow spinner and a big gun or two firing though, not as a motor cannon, but more like the P-39 drive train.

[tomo pauk]

(my apologies for necroing the thread)

The Bf-109F with some firepower - 3 cannons. 'Plugs' are attached to the fuselage, each serving as a U/C support and containing the cannon + ammo. Hull MGs deleted. The 'plugs' are perhaps 1/2 of those at 109H, and wings have clipped wing tips, so the wing span wouldn't grow noticeably. The U/C legs can be vertical now (when lowered), still offering wide track. Hmm, perhaps the gun barrels need to be more protruded?

If someone can draw a bent-wing 109, that would've been cool

[GTX]

Hmmm...interesting.

[sequoiaranger]

>The Bf-109F with some firepower - 3 cannons.<

Some Bf-109E's had two wing cannon plus the engine-mounted one, PLUS the two MG's in the cowl. Your "F" has LESS firepower!

I like the layout of the "half-H" wing root extension, not only to provide a place for cannon, but also widen the notoriously narrow and problematic track of the landing gear. But there seems no reason to delete the cowl guns, and MAYBE there is still room in the wings outboard the LG for a pair of MG's there, too??

[tomo pauk]

The Emil with 3 cannons was never fielded in any numbers, since the motor-kannone instalation was troubled with vibration problems 'till late 1940. The MG/FF(M)'s ammo count was was restricted with drum capacity (55-60 rounds for wing guns) - not the issue with MG-151. The MG-151 featured notably greater muzzle velocity thatn the MG/FF(M). Central installation was always better than wing one.
So I'd say my proposal presents vastly improved fire power

Glad you like the overall wing layout

The reason for deletion of MGs is to simplify production; the MGs would've added very small punch to the 3 cannons, while requiring to much in return.   

[GTX]

Perhaps the cowling gun removal could be linked to wait reduction due to the increase (in weight) from the wing plugs.  IIRC, Willy Messerschmitt was somewhat paranoid about achieving light weight designs...part of the reason for the 09's undercarriage arrangement in the first place.

Regards,

Greg

[rickshaw]

(my apologies for necroing the thread)

The Bf-109F with some firepower - 3 cannons. 'Plugs' are attached to the fuselage, each serving as a U/C support and containing the cannon + ammo. Hull MGs deleted. The 'plugs' are perhaps 1/2 of those at 109H, and wings have clipped wing tips, so the wing span wouldn't grow noticeably. The U/C legs can be vertical now (when lowered), still offering wide track. Hmm, perhaps the gun barrels need to be more protruded?

I'd suggest bulges in the wing top to cover the feed mechanism.  Where is the ammunition stored by the way?

[tomo pauk]

In the wings, behind wheel strut (when retracted).

[GTX]

Need extra range?



regards,

Greg